Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
Gemma 4 E2B IT scores 60.4 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.1-flash-1019's 54.8 (C), and leads in every scored category. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents that need a cheap, permissively licensed helper on 8 GB of memory, for tool calls, short audio or images, rather than hard reasoning
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 60
- Risk, 70 against 45
- Agent interface, 85 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 75 against 56
Watch for
No safety evaluation figures published
Best for Teams with a multi-GPU server that want an MIT-licensed flagship for long agent runs and coding
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
574 GB in FP8 with no smaller build from inclusionAI, so no single machine under 690 GB of GPU memory runs it
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Reach Gemma 4 E2B IT +35
Gemma 4 E2B IT 95
Memory 30, Google's own 4-bit QAT GGUF with its projector is 4.34 GB, which with a fifth on top is 5.2 GB and fits in 16 GB or less. Runtimes 25, released support in Transformers, vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp, Ollama and LM Studio, six of six. Builds 15, Google publishes a Q4_0 GGUF and a w4a16 build and two mobile builds, read as two kinds as for the 31B. Terms 15, plain Apache 2.0 with nothing added. Download 10, no account or gate. Hosted 0, the Gemini API serves only the two largest sizes and no inference provider lists this one.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 60
Memory 0, inclusionAI's only build is the FP8 release at 573.78 GB, × 1.2 = 688.5 GB, above 256 GB, and no runtime's library has a build. Runtimes 25, Released model code in Transformers 5.22.2 (bailing_hybrid), vLLM 0.33.0 (BailingMoeV3ForCausalLM, with ling3 tool and reasoning parsers), SGLang 0.5.23 (bailing_moe_v3.py, its bailing_hybrid config and MTP module) and llama.cpp b12242 (bailingmoe3), and Ollama, credited through its pinned llama.cpp as on the Ling-3.0-tiny listing: v0.40.16 sets LLAMA_CPP_VERSION to b12177. Builds 10, the release is FP8, the one quantised precision inclusionAI publishes for it. Terms 15, MIT in the card's metadata, with no use policy or other terms added on the card or in the repository. Download 10, the Hub API's model info gives gated false on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and no terms to accept. Hosted 0, the Hub API's provider mapping is empty for this repository on 10 November 2026. 0 + 25 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 60.
Risk Gemma 4 E2B IT +25
Gemma 4 E2B IT 70
File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF only, with nothing from the repository run on load. Provenance 15, the files sit in Google's own organisation and every file has a checksum. Safety evaluation 0, the card says testing showed minimal policy violations but gives no figures. Agent guidance 10, the card names the harm categories its safety training covers and asks for content-safety safeguards, and the tool guide says to validate calls, with no prompt-injection guidance. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 with no added policy, no threshold and a working link. Security programme 5, Google's security.txt and reward programme give a route to report a flaw, but no public Gemma advisories were found.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 45
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25), less 10 because the card's documented vLLM command passes --trust-remote-code, which runs the repository's configuration_bailing_moe_v3.py, since vLLM 0.33.0 registers no bailing_hybrid config of its own. Provenance 15, files in the inclusionAI organisation that inclusion-ai.org links to, per the Ling-3.0-tiny listing (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results for the model on its card or in the training-content summary. Agent guidance 0, the card has nothing on prompt injection, refusals or safeguards, and inclusionAI publishes no guardrail probe for this model as it did for Ling 3.0. Licence risk 15, MIT with no use policy, no field-of-use limits, no threshold and no clause letting inclusionAI change or revoke it. Security programme 0, www.inclusion-ai.org answers 404 for security.txt on 10 November 2026, and the Ling-3.0-tiny listing found no SECURITY.md or disclosure policy in the inclusionAI .github repository. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 45.
Agent interface Gemma 4 E2B IT +25
Gemma 4 E2B IT 85
Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository. Tool-calling format 25, Google documents how tools are declared and how calls come back, and ships a response schema for Transformers' parser. Trained tool calling 20, several calls in one turn. Structured output 0, nothing documents how to ask the weights for JSON or a schema. Reasoning control 10, thinking is off by default, turned on per request, and returned in a thought channel. Context 10, 131,072 tokens native, which meets the 128K line.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 60
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (6,042 characters), which handles tools, the thinking switch and preserved reasoning. Tool-calling format 10, only the template says how tools are declared (JSON in <tools>) and how calls come back (<tool_call>name with <arg_key> and <arg_value> pairs). Trained tool calling 20, the template tells the model it may call one or more functions and loops over every entry in an assistant message's tool_calls, and the card reports gains on agentic benchmarks, AA-Briefcase and AutomationBench-AA among them. Structured output 0, the card doesn't document JSON or JSON Schema output. Reasoning control 0, the card documents turning thinking on or off per request with chat_template_kwargs enable_thinking, and names the ling3 reasoning parser, but doesn't say where the reasoning text comes back. Context 10, 262,144 tokens natively in config.json (max_position_embeddings 262144, rope_scaling null) and per SGLang's cookbook. 20 + 10 + 20 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 60.
Documentation and upkeep Gemma 4 E2B IT +19
Gemma 4 E2B IT 75
Model card 20, all seven items are there. Training data 10, a general description by type with a January 2025 cut-off and the filtering, but no sources, mix or sizes. Last change 20, Google merged a fix for 233 glitch tokens in tokenizer.json on 3 November 2026, a day before 4 November. Responsiveness 10, Google replied to 9 of 24 questions and reports, the last on 2026-09-15, re-counted on 4 November. Version policy 10, earlier Gemma generations keep their own repositories and gemma.ai has a dated releases page. File health 5, the files agree with the card but a report about them waits without a reply.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 56
Model card 11, Intended use (complex reasoning, multi-step tasks and agentic workflows), architecture, parameters (560B total, 25B active) and context (1M claimed) are on the card. Training data 15, the training-content summary the card links names the source categories (Common Crawl and other public datasets, commercially licensed data, the Ant Spider crawler, synthetic data), the size band (over 10 trillion text tokens), data collected up to about July 2026 and the filtering, without listing datasets with sizes. Last change 20, the newest commit, on 4 November 2026, edited the card, six days before this check, and the files went up on 27 October. Responsiveness 0, Neither of the 2 discussions that aren't pull requests (both opened on 27 October 2026) has a reply from an inclusionAI member. Version policy 5, the update went into a repository of its own and Ling-3.1-flash and Ling 3.0 stay in theirs. File health 5, the card states a 1M-token context while config.json gives 262,144 with no rope scaling, and its serve commands name the earlier repository as the model path. 11 + 15 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 56.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Gemma 4 E2B IT | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 95 | 60 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +35 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 70 | 45 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +25 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 60 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 75 | 56 | Gemma 4 E2B IT +19 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 60.4/100 | C 54.8/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Gemma 4 E2B IT | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Google DeepMind | inclusionAI (Ant Group) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-11-03 | 2026-11-04 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 3.5/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
Gemma 4 E2B IT
A small open-weight model for light agent work, tool calls, short audio and images on a phone or laptop, under Apache 2.0. Google's 4-bit build needs about 5 GB with working space and runs in all the common runtimes. Google's card puts it far below larger Gemma 4 sizes on agent and coding tasks, and no safety results are published.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019
inclusionAI's newest flagship, a 560B hybrid mixture of experts under plain MIT that vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp run in released versions. It ships only as 574 GB of FP8, so it needs a multi-GPU server. The card overstates the context, documents little about tool calls, and has no safety results.
Before you call either
Gemma 4 E2B IT
- On the reference machine run
llama-server -hf google/gemma-4-E2B-it-qat-q4_0-gguf --hf-file gemma-4-E2B_q4_0-it.gguf --jinja -c 131072, and add--mmprojwith gemma-4-E2B-it-mmproj.gguf for images and audio - With Ollama run
ollama run gemma4:e2band raise num_ctx or OLLAMA_CONTEXT_LENGTH, since the default context is small and agents want at least 64K - In vLLM or SGLang pass
--tool-call-parser gemma4 --reasoning-parser gemma4(vLLM also--enable-auto-tool-choice), or tool calls come back as text; Google's w4a16 build is the 4-bit route there - Thinking is off by default; pass enable_thinking=True or start the system prompt with <|think|>, and drop earlier turns' thinking from history except on tool-call turns
- Put images before the text and audio after it, keep audio to 30 seconds and video to 60 frames, and validate tool names and arguments before running them
Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Serve it with SGLang 0.5.23 or later on 8 H200 or 4 GB300 GPUs, per the card, and use this repository's name as the model path, not the earlier one the card's command shows
- With vLLM pass
--trust-remote-code,--tool-call-parser ling3and--reasoning-parser ling3 - Set
chat_template_kwargsenable_thinkingfalse for direct answers. Reasoning comes back inreasoning_contentper SGLang's cookbook - Plan on 262,144 tokens of context. The 1M figure needs the YaRN override in SGLang's cookbook
- Use temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 20, per the card
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Gemma 4 E2B IT or Ling-3.1-flash-1019?
Gemma 4 E2B IT scores 60.4 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.1-flash-1019's 54.8 (C), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with Gemma 4 E2B IT or Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Arete-27B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Arete-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Carbon-X vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Carbon-X vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs gpt-oss-20b
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Granite 4.2 30B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Granite 4.2 8B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Inkling-Small
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Kimi K3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Kronos
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-1.7B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Mistral Large 4
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs SmolLM3-3B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-5.3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- gpt-oss-20b vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Inkling-Small vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Inkling vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kimi K3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kolibri-1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kronos vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna M.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Mistral Large 4
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs occamy-1.0
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs SmolLM3-3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/gemma-4-e2b-it-vs-ling-3-1-flash-1019.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/gemma-4-e2b-it.json·/api/v1/tools/ling-3-1-flash-1019.json - From a terminal
anchor compare gemma-4-e2b-it ling-3-1-flash-1019(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "gemma-4-e2b-it", "b": "ling-3-1-flash-1019"}at/mcp, no key